Featured Video

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

26 August 2008

On the Front Lines of the *Religious* Wars in Florida

I had this post ready two years ago, but for some weird reason, it never came up. Here it is.

I was beggining to wonder when would the first anti-Christian and anti-Creation post apear on LGF. It has been almost 2 days, and no evolutionary propaganda in Charles' blog.

Even though Charles doesn't say much, he does call evolution "science":

"New York Times writer Amy Harmon follows high school science teacher David Campbell’s efforts to reach students who’ve been raised as strict creationists, fighting a Florida political establishment that’s hostile to the science of evolution"
First of all, notice the highly reliable source of this article New York Times. We all know how the NYT is a honest, unbiased news agency, right? Right?

Leaving that aside, is evolution science? Does it meet the criteria of a scientific discipline? If it is science, it is open to criticism, or all criticism is ruled out as "religious", and therefore, "outside of science"?

Those are big questions, and we will have the time to comment on that.

People might wonder why do I consider evolutionism anti-Christian. Well, from the Biblical point of view, the world exists because God wanted it to exist. Life forms exist for the same reason.

The theory of evolution however (let's grant it the title "theory") says that the living world exists NOT bcause Someone wanted it to exist, but solely due to the result of unguided, impersonal forces of nature.

The article makes the common darwinian mistake of conflating natural selection with particles-to-people evolution. They use the inteligently guided change in Mickey Mouse as some form of evidence of what "nature" did without inteligent design.

Then they say that what happened to Mickey Mouse was "evolution". It never dawned the NYT writter that 1) the process was the result of inteligent design, NOT randomess as pescribed by darwinism, and 2) It was Mickey Mouse in the beggining as it it Mickey Moue today. Where's the evolution?!!

This type of bait and switch is very common among darwinists. They use the empirical fact that animals undergo changes as evidence that the living world came into existence without any Personal Design.

A word to the writter of this article and to the evolutionary teacher cited in the article:

If you are really trying to shove your religious theory down the american people's throat, try to find real evidences of what you believe. Natural selection is not evolution, and a cat that turns into a cat is not evidence for evolution, (specialy if you oppose evolution against creationism).

Secondly, don't forget what your theory says. It says that ALL the living forms in existence today are the result of NOTHING BUT the unguided, uncaused, unplanned, undirected, un-inteligent forces of nature.

THEREFORE you must find that magical force of nature that is able to do just that.

0 comentários:

Post a Comment

Be respectful. Comments are moderated.


Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More